Re: named vs 2.5.64-mm5

From: Felipe Alfaro Solana (felipe_alfaro@linuxmail.org)
Date: Wed Mar 12 2003 - 14:19:16 EST

----- Original Message -----
From: jjs <jjs@tmsusa.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 10:29:12 -0800
To: linux kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: named vs 2.5.64-mm5
 
> Greetings -
>
> 2.5.64-mm4 and -mm5 seem more rugged than previous
> kernels, but there are a couple of minor nits - one of them
> is the tendency of named (which appears to work reliably
> under 2.4) to go catatonic under recent 2.5.6x kernels -
>
> More verbose kernel logging may shed some light - or is
> this just a red herring? I get a tons of these in 2.5.64-mm5:
>
> <...>
> process `named' is using obsolete setsockopt SO_BSDCOMPAT
> process `named' is using obsolete setsockopt SO_BSDCOMPAT
> process `named' is using obsolete setsockopt SO_BSDCOMPAT
> <...>
>
> Anybody here running a compliant version of named?
>
> (This is the bind 9.2.1 which ships with Red Hat 8.0)
 
I would recommend you downloading BIND 9.2.2. It fixes many
bugs. Else, try the latest BIND from RedHat's RawHide repository.
HTH
 
   Felipe
  

-- 
______________________________________________
http://www.linuxmail.org/
Now with e-mail forwarding for only US$5.95/yr

Powered by Outblaze
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Mar 15 2003 - 22:00:32 EST